Eoghan Murphy (Dublin Bay South, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

I thank Deputies for their contributions in respect of this very important legislation. I apologise for the delay in getting to this point. I recognise the frustrations of people such as Deputy Sherlock, Senator Grace O'Sullivan and others, who wanted to know why it was taking so long. Part of the reason was because once there was a bit of a shift in the Government position, there was a realisation that there was an opportunity to go further and to be a leader in the EU context. That was on the understanding that we want to move together in the EU in terms of the Single Market and in the context of everything we are trying to do regarding the environment. We felt that if we could set an example which others could meet, we should do so. We have done that with this legislation. We are going further than our EU counterparts but they have made a commitment to catch up with us. That was part of the reason for the delay.

Deputy Ó Broin referred to a shift in the Government position. There has certainly been a shift in my position because, in my work as Minister for Housing, Planning and Local Government, I am also responsible for aspects of the marine environment. As a result of that work, I am involved in the British-Irish Council, BIC. Its committee deals with the OSPAR Convention and other works, which has meant I have been very deeply involved in the issue of microplastics since I began this job. I have been very well educated by my colleagues in the BIC on the issue. Deputy Lawless spoke about us all eating a credit card worth of plastic each week, which is a terrifying way to think about it. When one adds in all the debt as well, it must be quite bad for the digestive system.

Two points struck me early on. One is that in a recent study, 78% of all deepwater fish were found to have ingested microplastics. Another issue that was brought to my attention by colleagues abroad is that of the large continents of plastic making their way around the globe in different environments, which is terrifying. For some time in Irish society we have been having a very important reflection on the environment. "Blue Planet II" was seen to have been quite important in the debate in England, Scotland and Wales in terms of there being a collective moment where everyone happened to be watching the TV programme in which a baby whale suffocated and died from ingesting plastic. That had an effect on children and adults and it brought microplastics and plastics to the fore in the political debate there. All of those types of interventions that have been made by academics and people in popular culture to try to bring people like me to a more sensible and progressive position on the issue have worked. In the context of what Deputy Eamon Ryan stated in the earlier debate on the climate action plan regarding the responsibility we, as Members of this House, have to act as leaders in terms of trying to bring with us those members of the public who might still be sceptical on the need for some of these measures, I am of the view that we have a duty in this regard. As we take action in this regard, we should do so in responsible way and seek to constantly educate and inform the people and ourselves.

In the context of sunscreen lotions, I must be very careful, particularly in view of the purpose they serve. However, we are looking at the exemption in advance of Committee Stage. We have done some exploratory work to see whether it would be safe to remove the exemption but we will do a bit more work on it given the nature of sunscreen lotions. I assure Deputy Ó Broin that we are looking at the issue, as per his request.

On the question of how we define the size of microbeads and microplastics, 5 mm is the internationally recognised standard. We will do it to that standard in order to provide coherence in EU law, both the law that has already been adopted by some of our partner countries and the EU law that will follow as a result of the work we are doing here.

On the question about leave-on products, this is a more complicated aspect of the debate. First, we must recognise that such products do not have a direct pathway into drains and watercourses and, subsequently, into the oceans. Even though some can follow such a pathway, that is not meant to be a way for them to enter watercourses. Some make their way, but not all do. It is also my understanding that certain leave-on cosmetic products, while not having a medical role, do not currently have a ready replacement available and that we cannot move to ban them overnight. It is also the case with some leave-on products that the polymer in question is a liquid polymer and so it is treated differently from what solid plastic particles, nodes or, more correctly, nurdles. It is not the same as the microbead as we understand it in terms of what we are trying to address in this Bill. There is a new single-use plastics directive which includes provisions on labelling and directions for disposal. That requirement will be coming into law in all EU countries. We are looking at leave-on products. That is something we have committed to examine with our EU partners, particularly in light of some of the further complications that exist. Rather than waiting to resolve those complications, we know there is an immediate challenge in respect of microbeads. We know that they are doing damage. We have plenty of evidence for this and we now know how we can move very quickly to prohibit their use, ban them and, hopefully, eradicate them from the environment altogether.

In response to the question on when this will become law, once the Bill is passed by the Oireachtas I will not wait around because the industry does not need a lead-in time. Both the industry and the consumer are far ahead of us on this, so we can move to implement the law directly.

The derogation process is important. We have a three-month standstill derogation process to engaging with the European Commission whereby we show them what we are planning to do and it comes back with feedback on it. I will commence the derogation process now. When Second Stage is completed, we will go to the EU and state that this is what we plan to do.

If it has any major concerns, which we do not anticipate, it can come back to us and that will allow us to address them in time for Committee Stage, so we are not waiting to pass the Bill in its entirety and then seeking a derogation. I do not believe we would get it in place by the end of the year if we do that.

That also means that if a Member comes forward with a significant amendment it might risk us having to go back to the Commission to seek the derogation a second time. This is not to try to prevent a Member from getting into the weeds on this matter. I shared detailed copies of the legislation before it was finalised and brought to the Cabinet with Deputies who have shown leadership in this area so they would be well aware of what we are trying to do. I hope, therefore, there will not be amendments that might delay things unnecessarily. I believe it is probably prudent to seek the derogation now so we can meet the timelines as envisaged. With regard to the suntan issue, I said we are examining how we might address that on Committee Stage.

See this speech in context